NFUS VOICES CONCERNS OVER CROFTING PROPOSALS

NFU Scotland’s crofting members have significant reservations and major concerns over much of what is proposed for inclusion in the Scottish Government’s draft Crofting Reform (Scotland) Bill. The views of the Union have been included in its response to the current consultation on the proposed Bill, which closes today.

The Union’s views are based on lengthy discussions within its Crofting and Highlands & Islands Committee and a very strong response to a survey of all NFU Scotland’s crofting members.

Chair of the Crofting and Highlands & Islands Committee, Mrs Jo Durno said:
“Debate on the future of Scotland’s unique system of crofting has gathered pace since the committee of inquiry published its report in May 2008. Since then, the Scottish Government has published its draft Crofting Reform Bill which, after serious consideration, NFU Scotland believes needs significant changes if it is to address the concerns of crofters.

“Our crofting members have given us a clear message that the proposed legislative changes intended to implement the Scottish Government’s vision for crofting in the 21st century are misguided at best and, at worst, could actually undermine the very foundations of crofting communities and all that they deliver for rural Scotland.

“We are committed to ensuring that any legislative changes must deliver for active crofters and take crofting communities forward and in our response, we have outlined ways in which, along with the Scottish Government, we can deliver that vision.

“A key issue revolves around the proposed reforms actually delivering simplification rather than complication for crofters. We believe that there is potential within the Crofters Commission to deliver the necessary levels of governance without any additional bureaucracy. We also have serious concerns that any new mandatory crofting register, held by the Registers of Scotland, could create more problems and disputes than would otherwise exist. Our calls for simplification also extend to the support available for croft housing and a plea that existing lending arrangements are preserved without the proposed interference.

“We are also firmly of the opinion that croft houses should not be subject to occupancy requirements, and are opposed to the occupancy proposals. These are likely to be unpractical and unenforceable. The suggestion that local authorities would be able to rely on neighbours to inform on people who were suspected of not complying with the occupancy requirement is divisive and totally unacceptable. Instead, the proposals on crofting regulation would go some way in ensuring that the Crofters Commission made better use of existing powers to address abandonment and/or neglect.” Ends